Preparing interviews and questions

1. Regulatory Concept & Core Standards

This video's topic is preparing interviews and questions. By the end, you should be able to prepare a purposeful neutral interview. We will connect the information available, the criterion guiding the decision and the action that must be recorded. Follow the case and compare your answer with the proposed response. Internal-investigation techniques are recommended methods. They confer no police powers and do not replace employment or privacy law. The aim is impartial fact-finding, supported conclusions and suitable improvements.

Interviews clarify the person’s knowledge rather than impose the investigator’s theory. Give suitable procedural and data information. Recording needs separate assessment. Section 6 oral-report rules do not automatically govern every investigation interview.

Apply the following rule: Section 6(1) requires identifying information for formal reports. However, since 2026 section 10(3) protects people initially reporting without those requirements who are subsequently identified as whistleblowers and meet the statutory features. Section 11 requires pseudonymisation after recognition subject to exceptions, restricted access and proper identity protection. Anonymity differs from confidentiality.

2. Practical Implementation & Procedure

Prepare open questions and clarification. Separate direct knowledge and hearsay. Record accurately, clarify contradictions calmly and observe employment and procedural rights. Avoid assumptions within questions. Before moving on, turn this procedure into a sequence you could explain to a colleague. Identify the first check, the action that depends on its outcome and the record that allows the decision to be reconstructed. Follow the sequence on screen and identify the point where an error would change the result.

3. Case Study & Compliance Action

Instead of asking why theft was concealed, ask which payment the person saw and what happened next, without presuming guilt. Now read the case carefully. Separate established facts from information you would still need to confirm. Do not add motives or events that have not been described. This distinction matters when choosing a response proportionate to the information available.

The exercise is as follows: Why prefer neutral questions? Choose an answer and write one sentence explaining it. During the pause, compare your choice with the criteria we have just considered. Also think about the material you would retain to explain the decision later.

They elicit personal knowledge and reduce leading effects. Assess answers alongside other sources rather than automatically as final truth.

One mistake to avoid is: embedding guilt in a question.

Now apply the national rule to a second decision. The site promises anonymity but requires name and an identity-document copy. How should the contradiction be corrected?

Distinguish anonymous submission from formal reporting with section 6 data. Identification requirements do not themselves justify a document copy. Explain section 10(3) protection for a later-identified person and section 11 pseudonymisation. Align functionality, wording and minimisation.